Comments on: PhotoShelter’s Improved Image Processinghttp://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/photoshelters-improved-image-processing/
Photo Industry News, Resources, and OpinionThu, 08 Dec 2016 03:51:59 +0000hourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6.1By: Lauren Margolishttp://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/photoshelters-improved-image-processing/#comment-9561
Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:58:33 +0000http://blog.photoshelter.com/?p=24719#comment-9561@Derek We preserve your original color profile, so nothing is changed in the upload process. Also, PhotoShelter has supported infinite gallery nesting since we released the new Image Browser last spring. Please let us know if you have any questions about either image processing or gallery nesting – support@photoshelter.com.
]]>By: Derekhttp://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/photoshelters-improved-image-processing/#comment-9560
Mon, 29 Oct 2012 05:31:43 +0000http://blog.photoshelter.com/?p=24719#comment-9560Re: this “improved image processing,” why give us something we don’t need or want? I find this news very distressing. It assumes, as photographers, we don’t know what we are doing and need this type of paternalistic oversight. I spend I alot of time post-processing my web-destined images, which includes converting them to sRGB, outputting to highest level jpeg quality, sharpening them to the exact desired degree, adjusting gamma and color also to the exact desired degree, all on high-end, color calibrated hardware. And as such, I expect the integrity of my choices to be respected and maintained by my hosting provider, not altered post upload.

Frankly the examples of your image processing improvement shown on the above linked page, do not seem like improvements to me at all, especially when it comes to the sharpening effect. The “after” images look over-sharpened and pixilated.

At best, one would expect no alterations be made to the uploaded photos. At worst, if you feel you must cater to those unfamiliar with how to maximize the quality of their images themselves, you would at least provide those who do know how and choose to do it themselves the option of turning off this awful, annoying feature.

I agree – many of the images now look over-sharpened, but not a huge deal. Tagged display images is more important IMO.

]]>By: Tom Parkeshttp://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/photoshelters-improved-image-processing/#comment-9555
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:42:51 +0000http://blog.photoshelter.com/?p=24719#comment-9555The after images in the portrait examples now look over-sharpened to my eye, particularly the hair. If the new processing system is more accurately representing the original then that’s fine. Otherwise, it demonstrates the downside to a sledgehammer approach to sharpening. Overall, the difference is probably too small to worry over.
]]>By: Kevinhttp://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/photoshelters-improved-image-processing/#comment-9554
Thu, 27 Sep 2012 20:40:52 +0000http://blog.photoshelter.com/?p=24719#comment-9554Lauren,

What I see doing the roll over as suggested is the new and better looses or compresses the blacks and look darker. So if less detail in the shadows in order to darken the highlights is your methodology I’d suggest someone go back to school. See above posts for why you’ve erred, again at PS. I don’t manage histograms and spend my time giving shadow detail and highlight detail to have PS remove it.

GEEZ, don’t they teach color theory anymore or does the new generation just not care.

Google chrome is now recognizing ICC profiles.

]]>By: Rich Wagnerhttp://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/photoshelters-improved-image-processing/#comment-9553
Thu, 27 Sep 2012 20:01:55 +0000http://blog.photoshelter.com/?p=24719#comment-9553I checked the images in this blog post, and the sRGB profile is being embedded in displayed images, rather than leaving them untagged, which is fantastic.

Based on the embedded profile, it looks like Photoshelter is using the LCMS color management module (CMM) for color transformations, which is also fantastic. Marti Maria, the author of Little CMS, definitely knows the correct transfer function for sRGB is not gamma 2.2, so the color management should be spot-on. (You can verify this by searching this pdf for “sRGB” – http://www.littlecms.com/LittleCMS2.4%20API.pdf) LCMS is a well-respected CMM.

Having display images converted to and tagged with sRGB is great, as color-managed browsers (like Safari) should be able to display accurate color regardless of the color space of the original uploaded to Photoshelter (Adobe RGB, ProPhoto, etc.), or when the browser is used on a wide-gamut monitor. Now, to get all current browsers to use color management….

–Rich

]]>By: Rich Wagnerhttp://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/photoshelters-improved-image-processing/#comment-9552
Thu, 27 Sep 2012 19:31:08 +0000http://blog.photoshelter.com/?p=24719#comment-9552Wow, the blog post is very confusing, as it sure sounded like the color space of the original WAS being converted to sRGB (and it better not be!). That would be infuriating. I was panicked until I read the responses here.

And as far as “geeking out” on Wikipedia about gamma curves, the author better “geek out” on color management before posting on the topic. The gamma curve for sRGB is NOT 2.2, as it has a linear component at the “foot” end of the curve. That’s old news. I would hope that Photoshelter is using a standard sRGB profile for the conversion and not a hacked profile with an approximated 2.2 gamma curve.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRGB
“Unlike most other RGB color spaces, the sRGB gamma cannot be expressed as a single numerical value. The overall gamma is approximately 2.2, consisting of a linear (gamma 1.0) section near black, and a non-linear section elsewhere involving a 2.4 exponent and a gamma (slope of log output versus log input) changing from 1.0 through about 2.3.”